ISSUES AT STAKE: Land restitution is a complex issue

EVEN in our parliament, debates have not come up with a clear blueprint on how land ownership should be resolved or land restored to its original owners.

The issue is complicated by the fact that original owners may no longer be known, and in some cases such land could have been taken away from innocent people through a combination of the following: forced removals of the past, military conquest, and subterfuge and legal chicanery.

Issues of developed land and compensations are also added complications.

One major clause in the Constitution is that ‘South Africa belongs to all who live in it’.

While it may be easy for someone to simply say: ‘Let us just take the land back by force’, the reality is that the use of violence, force and intimidation, similar to that used by the apartheid government in the past, will solve nothing.

At best, it will be counter-productive.

The past discriminatory apartheid policies failed, dismally, to harmonise race relations in the country, partly as a result of unresolved disputes over land ownership.

Surely, we should learn from this experience.

In short, force only breeds bitterness and hatred. Legislation may also not be an answer to some complex socio-economic challenges.

Yes, there is an unfair imbalance in land ownership that has got to be put right, but not at the cost of chaos in our land.

What we need, perhaps even more than ever before, is a negotiated and agreed settlement on how to navigate the delicate and complex issues of land.

Above all, the economy must not suffer in such a process.

So then, who should be the arbitrator in deciding who should get what particular piece of land, and at what price?

Where in South Africa can we find such a person with the wisdom of our biblical King Solomon?

Our Constitution needs no amendment. Within it, the government has adequate powers to address matters it feels are in the best interest of the country’s citizens.

Parliament, within the Constitution, should be more about making laws that should govern the country, and less about displays of political power.

This week we read that Mary Chiwenga, wife of General Constantine Chiwenga, the new Vice President of Zimbabwe, has been accused of taking over a government-owned farm for her own use.

This has caused a storm as Zimbabweans believed the land ownership problems had been solved with the departure of Robert Mugabe in November.

We all know that the apportionment of land there to settle ancient land ownership claims led to the country failing as a successful food producer in Africa.

We need to agree that land is not limitless, and that it will never be enough to satisfy all of us.

Unplanned land grabs or invasions will certainly have unintended consequences.

No one right now can predict with accuracy how people on their own will handle and professionally manage created and unplanned scramble for limited land or use of force to dislodge people for political expediency.

Uncertainties in this regard should be left with government, which should always have adequate resources, will and power to deal with any possible deviant behaviour.